Editorial

No To Operation Python Dance

Published

7 years ago

January 18, 2019

The recent move by the Nigerian Army to deploy soldiers to all corners of the country to fight a wide range of criminal activities for two months under its Operation Python Dance III has raised concerns of a needlessly militarised Nigeria despite the nation’s struggle with insecurity.
Although the Army always tries to downplay the first impression the name creates to ease tension about its intentions,there is something that sounds immediately sinister about the Nigerian Army’s Operation Python Dance simply because of its code name originally derived from Exercise Egwu Eke, an Igbo phrase. The operation was first launched in the South-East region in 2016 to combat criminal activities like armed robbery and kidnapping.
The main reason why Operation Python Dance rings a very loud bell in Nigeria today is because of its very controversial aura and outing in the South- East region especially when it returned for a second time in 2017, code named Exercise Egwu Eke II or Operation Python Dance II.
The exercise which was used as a training platform for troops, gained widespread notoriety after soldiers of the Nigerian Army were involved in well-publicised clashes with members of the separatist group, the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), and its controversial leader, Nnamdi Kanu.
Soon after the commencement of the exercise in 2017, soldiers publicly clashed with IPOB members, with the group alleging that dozens of its members were killed in a crackdown that lasted for over a week and ended in the disappearance of Kanu before he later resurfaced in 2018.
In the course of that raid, soldiers also attacked the Abia State Council of the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ) in Umuahia, assaulted a national union officer and damaged laptops, phones and other valuables in the building.
Close to two years since Operation Python Dance II, the Army is relaunching the exercise for a third time, code named, Operation Python Dance III. This time around, it will be conducted everywhere across all the six geo-political zones in the country.
During a flag-off ceremony on Friday, December 28, 2018, the Chief of Army Staff, Lieutenant-General Tukur Buratai, represented by the Army’s Chief of Training and Operations, Major-General Lamidi Adeosun, announced that the exercise would run from January 1 to February 28, 2019 as a fulfilment of the Army’s mandate to conduct internal security operations in the country to combat criminality and other security challenges.
More importantly, Maj.-Gen Adeosun noted that the exercise aims to ensure that law and order are maintained as the nation approaches the 2019 general elections.
Said he: “As the build up to the 2019 general elections gathers momentum, an upsurge of security challenges stockpiling of arms by criminal groups, formation of ethnic militias and violence induced by political activities has been observed”.
The question is, why does a military training exercise aimed at combating criminal activities across the country forebodes frightening possibilities? To begin with, public trust in the Nigerian Army is characteristically low.
For instance, during a series of protests by hundreds of members of the Islamic Movement in Nigeria (IMN) in October, soldiers applied lethal force and opened fire on demonstrators, killing around 50 people and injuring dozens. Even though the Army only admitted to killing six while also claiming that soldiers acted with utmost responsibility, several video evidences of the clashes on social media had proved its claims to be largely false.
The Army’s conduct with those protesters and its conduct during Operation Python Dance II in the South- East and during many of its engagement with the civilian population do not exactly elicit confidence about a large-scale military operation in the country, especially during an election year.
Also, deploying troops to combat “an upsurge of security challenges”, even in parts of the country that are not troubled, begs for more convincing answers than preventing possible election-related troubles.
This is particularly puzzling since the Army has recently suffered damaging losses against terrorist group, Boko Haram, in the North-East region that has been troubled for nearly 10 years, with the group’s insurgency leaving tens of thousands dead and millions displaced.
Why is the Army broadly deploying a military operation to provide security in peaceful locations in the country when it could more properly focus attention on critical conflict zones like the North-East?
It is against this backdrop that The Tide thinks that the crux of the fears surrounding Operation Python Dance III rests squarely at the door of politics and could easily be a ploy by the ruling government to intimidate voters and rig the 2019 presidential election.
We say so because Nigeria is a democratic state and is not in a state of emergency that requires the militarisation of her electoral process.With President Muhammadu Buhari, a former military Head of State, at the helm, the military moves tend to be placed under more scrutiny than the usual; and Operation Python Dance III is one of such that should raise eyebrows.
Nigeria, as a democratic state, does not have an overwhelming security problem that should trigger a military operation on the scale of Operation Python Dance III and the fact that it covers the period of high-stakes elections already set to be contentious makes it all the more worrisome about what the motive and outcome might be. It is on that note that we say no to the exercise.

Editorial

No To Political Office Holders’ Salary Hike

Published

2 days ago

September 22, 2025

Uchechukwu Okwum

Nigeria’s Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) has unveiled a gratuitous proposal to increase the salaries of political and public office holders in the country. This plan seeks to fatten the pay packets of the president, vice-president, governors, deputy governors, and members of the National and State Assemblies. At a time when the nation is struggling to steady its economy, the suggestion that political leaders should be rewarded with more money is not only misplaced but insulting to the sensibilities of the ordinary Nigerian.

What makes the proposal even more opprobrious is the dire economic condition under which citizens currently live. The cost of living crisis has worsened, inflation has eroded the purchasing power of workers, and the naira continues to tumble against foreign currencies. The majority of Nigerians are living hand to mouth, with many unable to afford basic foodstuffs, medical care, and education. Against this backdrop, political office holders, who already enjoy obscene allowances, perks, and privileges, should not even contemplate a salary increase.

It is, therefore, not surprising that the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has stepped in to challenge this development. SERAP has filed a lawsuit against the RMAFC to halt the implementation of this salary increment. This resolute move represents a voice of reason and accountability at a time when public anger against political insensitivity is palpable. The group is rightly insisting that the law must serve as a bulwark against impunity.

According to a statement issued by SERAP’s Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, the commission has been dragged before the Federal High Court in Abuja. Although a hearing date remains unconfirmed, the momentous step of seeking judicial redress reflects a determination to hold those in power accountable. SERAP has once again positioned itself as a guardian of public interest by challenging an elite-centric policy.

The case, registered as suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1834/2025, specifically asks the court to determine “whether RMAFC’s proposed salary hike for the president, vice-president, governors and their deputies, and lawmakers in Nigeria is not unlawful, unconstitutional and inconsistent with the rule of law.” This formidable question goes to the very heart of democratic governance: can those entrusted with public resources decide their own pay rises without violating the constitution and moral order?

In its pleadings, SERAP argues that the proposed hike runs foul of both the 1999 Nigerian Constitution and the RMAFC Act. By seeking a judicial declaration that such a move is unlawful, unconstitutional, and inconsistent with the rule of law, the group has placed a spotlight on the tension between self-serving leadership and constitutionalism. To trivialise such an issue would be harum-scarum, for the constitution remains the supreme authority guiding governance.

We wholeheartedly commend SERAP for standing firm, while we roundly condemn RMAFC’s selfish proposal. Political office should never be an avenue for financial aggrandisement. Since our leaders often pontificate sacrifice to citizens, urging them to tighten their belts in the face of economic turbulence, the same leaders must embody sacrifice themselves. Anything short of this amounts to double standards and betrayal of trust.

The Nigerian economy is not buoyant enough to shoulder the additional cost of a salary increase for political leaders. Already, lawmakers and executives enjoy allowances that are grossly disproportionate to the national average income. These earnings are sufficient not only for their needs but also their unchecked greed. To even consider further increments under present circumstances is egregious, a slap in the face of ordinary workers whose minimum wage remains grossly insufficient.

Resources earmarked for such frivolities should instead be channelled towards alleviating the suffering of citizens and improving the nation’s productive capacity. According to United Nations statistics, about 62.9 per cent of Nigerians were living in multidimensional poverty in 2021, compared to 53.7 per cent in 2017. Similarly, nearly 30.9 per cent of the population lives below the international poverty line of US$2.15 per day. These figures paint a stark picture: Nigeria is a poor country by all measurable standards, and any extra naira diverted to elite pockets deepens this misery.

Besides, the timing of this proposal could not be more inappropriate. At a period when unemployment is soaring, inflation is crippling households, and insecurity continues to devastate communities, the RMAFC has chosen to pursue elite enrichment. It is widely known that Nigeria’s economy is in a parlous state, and public resources should be conserved and wisely invested. Political leaders must show prudence, not profligacy.

Another critical dimension is the national debt profile. According to the Debt Management Office, Nigeria’s total public debt as of March 2025 stood at a staggering N149.39 trillion. External debt obligations also remain heavy, with about US$43 billion outstanding by September 2024. In such a climate of debt-servicing and borrowing to fund budgets, it is irresponsible for political leaders to even table the idea of inflating their salaries further. Debt repayment, not self-reward, should occupy their minds.

This ignoble proposal is insensitive, unnecessary, and profoundly reckless. It should be discarded without further delay. Public office is a trust, not an entitlement to wealth accumulation. Nigerians deserve leaders who will share in their suffering, lead by example, and prioritise the common good over self-indulgence. Anything less represents betrayal of the social contract and undermines the fragile democracy we are striving to build.

Editorial

No To Political Office Holders’ Salary Hike

Published

2 days ago

September 22, 2025

The Tide

Editorial

Rivers’ Retirees: Matters Arising

Published

2 weeks ago

September 8, 2025

The Tide

The Rivers State Government deserves commendation for the manner in which it conducted the last biometric exercise for pensioners in the state. For the first time in many years, the verification process was not only efficient but also humane, a development that has brought relief to a category of citizens that often bears the brunt of neglect.

Unlike previous verification exercises that left pensioners exhausted and unattended, the latest exercise set a refreshing precedent. Retirees were given proper and sumptuous meals, and in addition, the government paid the sum of N10,000 into their accounts to cushion their transportation costs. Such gestures go a long way in demonstrating that those who had laboured for the state are not forgotten in their twilight years.

The measure was particularly necessary given that some pensioners had to travel long distances to reach their verification centres. For elderly men and women, such journeys come with physical and financial strain. By recognising these realities and easing the burden, the government has shown that pensioners deserve dignity, not disdain.

Beyond this laudable act of consideration, the authorities must reflect on the very structure of pension verification. The era of compelling retirees to be physically present for routine verification should be reconsidered. With digital tools and innovation, the government can adopt systems that capture and confirm data without the stress of physical assembly. This is crucial for pensioners residing in other states or even abroad.

While we acknowledge the importance of verification in cleaning up pension records, we cannot ignore the darker side of the matter. It is regrettable that some allowances continue to be paid to deceased pensioners, with relatives fraudulently collecting the funds. The latest biometrics, thankfully, exposed some of these sharp practices. The exercise, therefore, is not only about order but also about justice.

We urge families of deceased pensioners to be patriotic enough to inform the government of the deaths of their loved ones. It is deeply shameful that in some instances, individuals attempted to impersonate late pensioners during the biometrics. Such behaviour undermines the spirit of honesty and deprives genuine retirees of their due entitlements.

The exercise also revealed another important area of concern: the health of pensioners. It is reassuring to learn that the state government has reportedly promised to take over the medical treatment of some retirees who arrived for the biometrics in critical condition. This is a step in the right direction. Elderly citizens, after years of service, should have access to special health care facilities in the state. Setting aside hospitals or designated centres for the aged is not just desirable but necessary.

While pension payments in Rivers State have remained consistent, attention must now be directed towards gratuities. Senior citizens deserve to receive their retirement benefits without the bureaucratic hitches that have often marred the process. After years of loyal service, nothing is more demoralising than to see retirees languish for want of their gratuities. Every worker, as Scripture reminds us, is worthy of his wage.

Retirement, in any civilised society, should not be reduced to a sentence of suffering. In dealing with pensioners, government must consistently wear a human face. The humane manner displayed during this verification exercise should not be a one-off. It must become the norm in all dealings with retirees. Measures must continually be put in place to ensure that they do not feel abandoned by the state they served.

One welcome innovation has already been introduced. The Sole Administrator of Rivers State, Vice Admiral (Rtd) Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas, has altered the method of gratuity payment. Pensioners now receive their monies directly into their bank accounts, eliminating the cheque-based system that for years served as fertile ground for corruption. This reform is both pragmatic and forward-looking. Similarly, the implementation of the N32,000 pension harmonisation is also commendable.

Direct payments gratuities ensure transparency and drastically reduce the possibility of diversion of funds. More importantly, they restore confidence in the system and assure pensioners that their entitlements will reach them without interference. In this way, the government has not only safeguarded the process but also upheld the principle of accountability.

Seamless gratuity payment has a ripple effect on the workforce as a whole. When workers are confident that retirement will not plunge them into hardship, the temptation to falsify age in order to remain in service is eliminated. Such reforms, therefore, enhance efficiency, honesty, and productivity in the public service.

In sum, the Rivers State Government has struck a refreshing chord in its handling of pension verification. It has shown empathy, innovation, and accountability. However, the momentum must be sustained, and the focus must shift towards modernising verification methods and prioritising retirees’ welfare in health, gratuity, and dignity.

When retirees are treated with compassion and fairness, the message to those still in service is clear: faithful service to the state will not go unrewarded. The humane verification exercise, though a single event, offers a hopeful glimpse of what governance can look like when people, especially the elderly, are placed at the heart of policy.